Miyamoto: Many People Are Scared of Gaming Technology

[John Funk]

As used as gamers are to our traditional interfaces like controllers or the mouse-and-keyboard setup, it's because we've grown up with them and they're second nature to us. But for people who haven't grown up as gamers, they're horrendously intimidating.

But whereas the controller is intimidating, there is no interface more natural than the human hand; you point at something, and you select it.

Objection!

Have you ever seen a non-gamer play an FPS game with a mouse and keyboard?

they may be utterly useless with the keyboard controls but anyone can MASTER the mouse aim like second nature, you know why? Because BILLIONS of people are familiar with how to use a mouse pointer to quickly aim at and "hit" an icon on a screen from their use of desktop computers.

Hell the mouse pointer has been around since the 1970's and is favoured the world over for ergonomic precision where it has remained virtually unmodified in that time except upgrading the track-ball to laser guidance BECAUSE IT NEEDS THAT MUCH PRECISION, WHOOOAAARRRRGG!!.

An example of its ease of use: My best friend's girlfriend who gets scared by PG-13 movies was able to shoot down zombies and even master the gravity gun in Half Life 2 on first attempt with ANY FPS game using MOUSE CONTROLS, though of course the problem was most of the time she stayed rooted in one spot as she couldn't find WASD. But then in weird co-operation her BF would do the walking, jumping, reloading and so on. Now THAT took coordination.

Gamepad... might as well have handed her an M16 and asked her to field strip it.

So granted, keyboard is one of the trickiest controller interface to get used to (though also most flexible in terms of numbers of available buttons), the most ideal interface is an airplane style joystck for the left hand and regular laser mouse for the right.

Wii-remote and PS-Move are not THAT intuitive unless you happen to target shoot with a pistol. I've shot air pistol and no, people's aim with an unsupported pointing device is far worse than a mouse, mainly because you lack any forearm support nor can you vary resistance with pressure, nor that "heel pivot" that people naturally do when using a mouse. Also, lift a mouse and instantly disengage so you can adjust your arm to a better position.

Put it this way, do you think ANY office environment is going to get rid of their USB mouse controls and switch to PS-move?!?! Except as a marketing stunt? I don't think so.

PS-Move is a step in the right direction but I really do wonder HOW LONG will it take for the big industry names to cotton on to this MASSIVE market of people who ALREADY are 'ace sharpshooters' from years of office work and browsing websites with A MOUSE!.

Flash games exploit mouse controls perfectly, and they are major competitors to consoles in terms of the market's time if not money.

Maybe PS-move and it's ilk will be the ice-breaker. Console FPS games in the past HAD to use gamepad controls, but couldn't implement mouse as well especially with online interaction = unfair advantage (REALLY unfair). But PS-Move at least gives some advantage, they might as well throw in mouse aim to these games as well and have interesting online rankings.

You need to read the whole phrase, dude.

Mouse... and keyboard interface. Not "mouse interface" and "keyboard interface," but "mouse and keyboard." And using both - much less simultaneously - is horrendously intuitive.

Whatever you say about us using the mouse since 1970, we've been pointing for thousands of years.

 

[Treblaine]

As used as gamers are to our traditional interfaces like controllers or the mouse-and-keyboard setup, it's because we've grown up with them and they're second nature to us. But for people who haven't grown up as gamers, they're horrendously intimidating.

But whereas the controller is intimidating, there is no interface more natural than the human hand; you point at something, and you select it.

Objection!

[small]Have you ever seen a non-gamer play an FPS game with a mouse and keyboard?

they may be utterly useless with the keyboard controls but anyone can MASTER the mouse aim like second nature, you know why? Because BILLIONS of people are familiar with how to use a mouse pointer to quickly aim at and "hit" an icon on a screen from their use of desktop computers.

Hell the mouse pointer has been around since the 1970's and is favoured the world over for ergonomic precision where it has remained virtually unmodified in that time except upgrading the track-ball to laser guidance BECAUSE IT NEEDS THAT MUCH PRECISION, WHOOOAAARRRRGG!!.

An example of its ease of use: My best friend's girlfriend who gets scared by PG-13 movies was able to shoot down zombies and even master the gravity gun in Half Life 2 on first attempt with ANY FPS game using MOUSE CONTROLS, though of course the problem was most of the time she stayed rooted in one spot as she couldn't find WASD. But then in weird co-operation her BF would do the walking, jumping, reloading and so on. Now THAT took coordination.

Gamepad... might as well have handed her an M16 and asked her to field strip it.

So granted, keyboard is one of the trickiest controller interface to get used to (though also most flexible in terms of numbers of available buttons), the most ideal interface is an airplane style joystck for the left hand and regular laser mouse for the right.

Wii-remote and PS-Move are not THAT intuitive unless you happen to target shoot with a pistol. I've shot air pistol and no, people's aim with an unsupported pointing device is far worse than a mouse, mainly because you lack any forearm support nor can you vary resistance with pressure, nor that "heel pivot" that people naturally do when using a mouse. Also, lift a mouse and instantly disengage so you can adjust your arm to a better position.

Put it this way, do you think ANY office environment is going to get rid of their USB mouse controls and switch to PS-move?!?! Except as a marketing stunt? I don't think so.

PS-Move is a step in the right direction but I really do wonder HOW LONG will it take for the big industry names to cotton on to this MASSIVE market of people who ALREADY are 'ace sharpshooters' from years of office work and browsing websites with A MOUSE!.

Flash games exploit mouse controls perfectly, and they are major competitors to consoles in terms of the market's time if not money.

Maybe PS-move and it's ilk will be the ice-breaker. Console FPS games in the past HAD to use gamepad controls, but couldn't implement mouse as well especially with online interaction = unfair advantage (REALLY unfair). But PS-Move at least gives some advantage, they might as well throw in mouse aim to these games as well and have interesting online rankings.[/small]

You need to read the whole phrase, dude.

Mouse... and keyboard interface. Not "mouse interface" and "keyboard interface," but "mouse and keyboard." And using both - much less simultaneously - is horrendously intuitive.

Whatever you say about us using the mouse since 1970, we've been pointing for thousands of years.

Well I did read your WHOLE post, and extending the same courtesy to my post then you'd have seem I'd make the argument keep the mouse for aiming and introduce a JOYSTICK in the left hand for movement, jumping, etc.

Pointing for thousands of years? Don't be silly, that pointing has never been for any kind of precision.

Yes we have been pointing vaguely for "thousands of years" but in the sort your talking about it has just been vary vague direction. It's not like we naturally emit a laser beam from the tip of our index finger, it may be "natural" to point but it is only ever used in the vague possible sense like: "Oh, he went that-er way". I mean how often has someone pointed something out and you gone "which one? This one or that one?"

The reason so many gun fights have dozens of shots fires and no one hit is people are dumb enough to think they can try "point shooting" with a pistol only they miss as the "natural precision" of human pointing is VERY imprecise.

And I can speak from experience it is NOT natural to point for any extended periods. I mean I know this drinking game where you have to hold a drink at full arms length for as long as possible... after 30 seconds you muscles are burning. Try it.

In fact the only time in history I know where a straight extended arm is used directly to "point" at something to aim is the very old and OUTDATED style of pistol shooting:

notoriously inaccurate

Today, point shooting is never relied on for people who are trained to shoot with pistols like police or army. They are trained to lock both arms together and aim along the sights actually pivoting their entire body for people to come close to consistently hitting a 17 inch wide target at just 25 meters. That width would appear about the height of the "Post" button at the bottom on this page... easy to hit with a mouse.

But what about under the ABSOLUTE MOST IDEAL circumstances: The Olympic air pistol competition where rules requires a single handed hold. Yet the Top Athletes in the world struggle to get all hits within a 17cm wide circle at only 10 meters away. That's the equivalent accuracy required as clicking on a button that is OVER HALF AN INCH wide on a computer monitor (assuming your eyes are 75cm from the screen) which is EASY for a mouse...

Can this be explained any more more explicitly? A simple USB laser mouse is easier and more precise to aim than merely pointing, whether Wii-mote or PS-Move!!!

And I still think Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and all the developers should start allowing mouse support for all their video games, every game that has a controllable camera. It would do great for both the hardcore AND the casual gamer.

 

[John Funk]

Well I did read your WHOLE post, and extending the same courtesy to my post then you'd have seem I'd make the argument keep the mouse for aiming and introduce a JOYSTICK in the left hand for movement, jumping, etc.

Pointing for thousands of years? Don't be silly, that pointing has never been for any kind of precision.

Yes we have been pointing vaguely for "thousands of years" but in the sort your talking about it has just been vary vague direction. It's not like we naturally emit a laser beam from the tip of our index finger, it may be "natural" to point but it is only ever used in the vague possible sense like: "Oh, he went that-er way". I mean how often has someone pointed something out and you gone "which one? This one or that one?"

The reason so many gun fights have dozens of shots fires and no one hit is people are dumb enough to think they can try "point shooting" with a pistol only they miss as the "natural precision" of human pointing is VERY imprecise.

And I can speak from experience it is NOT natural to point for any extended periods. I mean I know this drinking game where you have to hold a drink at full arms length for as long as possible... after 30 seconds you muscles are burning. Try it.

In fact the only time in history I know where a straight extended arm is used directly to "point" at something to aim is the very old and OUTDATED style of pistol shooting:

notoriously inaccurate

Today, point shooting is never relied on for people who are trained to shoot with pistols like police or army. They are trained to lock both arms together and aim along the sights actually pivoting their entire body for people to come close to consistently hitting a 17 inch wide target at just 25 meters. That width would appear about the height of the "Post" button at the bottom on this page... easy to hit with a mouse.

But what about under the ABSOLUTE MOST IDEAL circumstances: The Olympic air pistol competition where rules requires a single handed hold. Yet the Top Athletes in the world struggle to get all hits within a 17cm wide circle at only 10 meters away. That's the equivalent accuracy required as clicking on a button that is OVER HALF AN INCH wide on a computer monitor (assuming your eyes are 75cm from the screen) which is EASY for a mouse...

Can this be explained any more more explicitly? A simple USB laser mouse is easier and more precise to aim than merely pointing, whether Wii-mote or PS-Move!!!

And I still think Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and all the developers should start allowing mouse support for all their video games, every game that has a controllable camera. It would do great for both the hardcore AND the casual gamer.

I did read your whole post. I just disagree.

And the human hand is the most intuitive interface there is. I can't believe you're trying to argue that. Babies point. And when you say "Oh, it's inaccurate if you're pointing at something far away," of course it is. A mouse would be, too.

But look at touch controls. As much as I don't like the brand, the iPhone is incredibly intuitive. You tap whatever you want on the screen. That's why touch control - and motion control - is taking off so hugely.

Even if the mouse WERE somehow more intuitive than the natural human body, that's still irrelevant for gaming. Let's say we were playing a golf game. You could use the mouse to swing by, I don't know, flicking it to the side and learning how different angles affected the slice, curve, whatever. Or, you could mimic an actual golf swing and have it do the same.

There's a big, big difference.

 

[Cody211282]

Yea but that's the movies, 99% of the time in real life it doesn't work like that

 

[blarghblarghhhhh]

everyone really should hit that link and read the full interview. it was very enlightening and actually reminded me of why i like him. Hes very aware of what makes a good game work.

 

[Trapilon]

Well I did read your WHOLE post, and extending the same courtesy to my post then you'd have seem I'd make the argument keep the mouse for aiming and introduce a JOYSTICK in the left hand for movement, jumping, etc.

Pointing for thousands of years? Don't be silly, that pointing has never been for any kind of precision.

Yes we have been pointing vaguely for "thousands of years" but in the sort your talking about it has just been vary vague direction. It's not like we naturally emit a laser beam from the tip of our index finger, it may be "natural" to point but it is only ever used in the vague possible sense like: "Oh, he went that-er way". I mean how often has someone pointed something out and you gone "which one? This one or that one?"

The reason so many gun fights have dozens of shots fires and no one hit is people are dumb enough to think they can try "point shooting" with a pistol only they miss as the "natural precision" of human pointing is VERY imprecise.

And I can speak from experience it is NOT natural to point for any extended periods. I mean I know this drinking game where you have to hold a drink at full arms length for as long as possible... after 30 seconds you muscles are burning. Try it.

In fact the only time in history I know where a straight extended arm is used directly to "point" at something to aim is the very old and OUTDATED style of pistol shooting:

notoriously inaccurate

Today, point shooting is never relied on for people who are trained to shoot with pistols like police or army. They are trained to lock both arms together and aim along the sights actually pivoting their entire body for people to come close to consistently hitting a 17 inch wide target at just 25 meters. That width would appear about the height of the "Post" button at the bottom on this page... easy to hit with a mouse.

But what about under the ABSOLUTE MOST IDEAL circumstances: The Olympic air pistol competition where rules requires a single handed hold. Yet the Top Athletes in the world struggle to get all hits within a 17cm wide circle at only 10 meters away. That's the equivalent accuracy required as clicking on a button that is OVER HALF AN INCH wide on a computer monitor (assuming your eyes are 75cm from the screen) which is EASY for a mouse...

Can this be explained any more more explicitly? A simple USB laser mouse is easier and more precise to aim than merely pointing, whether Wii-mote or PS-Move!!!

And I still think Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and all the developers should start allowing mouse support for all their video games, every game that has a controllable camera. It would do great for both the hardcore AND the casual gamer.

I did read your whole post. I just disagree.

And the human hand is the most intuitive interface there is. I can't believe you're trying to argue that. Babies point. And when you say "Oh, it's inaccurate if you're pointing at something far away," of course it is. A mouse would be, too.

But look at touch controls. As much as I don't like the brand, the iPhone is incredibly intuitive. You tap whatever you want on the screen. That's why touch control - and motion control - is taking off so hugely.

Even if the mouse WERE somehow more intuitive than the natural human body, that's still irrelevant for gaming. Let's say we were playing a golf game. You could use the mouse to swing by, I don't know, flicking it to the side and learning how different angles affected the slice, curve, whatever. Or, you could mimic an actual golf swing and have it do the same.

There's a big, big difference.

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

 

[Treblaine]

Well I did read your WHOLE post, and extending the same courtesy to my post then you'd have seem I'd make the argument keep the mouse for aiming and introduce a JOYSTICK in the left hand for movement, jumping, etc.

Pointing for thousands of years? Don't be silly, that pointing has never been for any kind of precision.

Yes we have been pointing vaguely for "thousands of years" but in the sort your talking about it has just been vary vague direction. It's not like we naturally emit a laser beam from the tip of our index finger, it may be "natural" to point but it is only ever used in the vague possible sense like: "Oh, he went that-er way". I mean how often has someone pointed something out and you gone "which one? This one or that one?"

The reason so many gun fights have dozens of shots fires and no one hit is people are dumb enough to think they can try "point shooting" with a pistol only they miss as the "natural precision" of human pointing is VERY imprecise.

And I can speak from experience it is NOT natural to point for any extended periods. I mean I know this drinking game where you have to hold a drink at full arms length for as long as possible... after 30 seconds you muscles are burning. Try it.

In fact the only time in history I know where a straight extended arm is used directly to "point" at something to aim is the very old and OUTDATED style of pistol shooting:

notoriously inaccurate

Today, point shooting is never relied on for people who are trained to shoot with pistols like police or army. They are trained to lock both arms together and aim along the sights actually pivoting their entire body for people to come close to consistently hitting a 17 inch wide target at just 25 meters. That width would appear about the height of the "Post" button at the bottom on this page... easy to hit with a mouse.

But what about under the ABSOLUTE MOST IDEAL circumstances: The Olympic air pistol competition where rules requires a single handed hold. Yet the Top Athletes in the world struggle to get all hits within a 17cm wide circle at only 10 meters away. That's the equivalent accuracy required as clicking on a button that is OVER HALF AN INCH wide on a computer monitor (assuming your eyes are 75cm from the screen) which is EASY for a mouse...

Can this be explained any more more explicitly? A simple USB laser mouse is easier and more precise to aim than merely pointing, whether Wii-mote or PS-Move!!!

And I still think Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and all the developers should start allowing mouse support for all their video games, every game that has a controllable camera. It would do great for both the hardcore AND the casual gamer.

I did read your whole post. I just disagree.

And the human hand is the most intuitive interface there is. I can't believe you're trying to argue that. Babies point. And when you say "Oh, it's inaccurate if you're pointing at something far away," of course it is. A mouse would be, too.

But look at touch controls. As much as I don't like the brand, the iPhone is incredibly intuitive. You tap whatever you want on the screen. That's why touch control - and motion control - is taking off so hugely.

Even if the mouse WERE somehow more intuitive than the natural human body, that's still irrelevant for gaming. Let's say we were playing a golf game. You could use the mouse to swing by, I don't know, flicking it to the side and learning how different angles affected the slice, curve, whatever. Or, you could mimic an actual golf swing and have it do the same.

There's a big, big difference.

To quoth: And when you say "Oh, it's inaccurate if you're pointing at something far away," of course it is. A mouse would be, too.

No, I don't think it is a case that you simply disagree, if you did read my post in full as you say I think it's simply a case that you fail to understand the simple truth of the matter.

Look, it's simple maths:

screen distance: 0.75m
pistol target distance: 10m

relative distance = 10/0.75 = 13.33

So for a Circular target that is say 17cm wide, projected back to only 0.75m it would be:

17/13.33 = 1.25cm ~ 1/2 inch

OK, look at this little pic:

That's roughly how big a 17cm Olympic Air-Pistol target will appear at 10m (assuming you have a 15.5 inch screen and are sitting approximately 75cm from the screen) get a ruler and check it's about 0.5inch.

Now how easy is it for you with a mouse to click on the very bullseye of the target? Hell you'd find it easy to repeatedly and quickly put the cursor dead centre. But Olympic shooters with the same APPARENT sized target struggle to get any where close to half on the bullseye and that is ENTIRELY down to how the RULES of the sport require a POINTING stance.

Now the air pistols used have excellent sights, and they can be as clear to place as a mouse cursor but AGAIN AND AGAIN we come back to how holding your arm out straight is an incredibly inefficient, ineffective and outdated way of precisely aiming and they only do that because the rules of the Olympic Sport require a single shooting hand is used, unsupported.

So I'm sorry but your argument of "a mouse struggles just as much to hit 'far away' targets" just doesn't hold an ounce of water.

See one of the great things about a mouse is once the cursor is on target, just relax, and the cursor will stay right on target. But with a pointer you must CLENCH to hold position.

And at the end of the day... has your mother ever fired a pistol accurately? Well, who knows your mom could be a cop or something but mine hasn't who is along with hundreds of millions of other "casual users" that are familiar and confident with a mouse. Hell, of new computer users, if it's one thing they take naturally to it's the mouse.

You seem to hold FAR too much importance to this innate GESTURE of pointing as if it is some kind of precise human measuring device like the ability to distinguish which way is up and down. Pointing is JUST a gesture in part of our library of body language, it may be "INTUITIVE" to do it but it is NOT intuitive to do it accurately. EVERYONE struggles to point with accuracy or precision. Nobody struggles with a mouse, or at lest not for long.

I think I have established beyond any doubt exactly how the general public are familiar, competent and capable with the mouse.

You mention touch controls, well those are a much better step in the right direction, I'm a big fan of the Nintendo DS for it's touch-pad but a touch pad is far from ideal though is suited to a portable device as size, weight and space are premium so buttons, tracking, pad and output are all shoved onto one screen which can be less than ideal sometimes. I mean the stylus/finger obscures the screen, you can't get proper buttons, the pad/tracking is not as accurate as it could be if it had a dedicated area. But at least your hand can be partially supported and it is far more like writing which can be very quick and precise.

You also mention other non-aiming aspects like a virtual golf tee and I will agree with you whole heartedly on that and Sony definitely does as well. If you look at their adverts they have quite rightly focused far more on how PS-Move is a great 3D tracking technology with their boxing simulator and so on rather than an excellent 2D tracker that a simple mouse is. Hell, Socom 4's aiming and LBP's "magic-hand" seemed like an afterthought in their presentations.

Though the Big Three are fools to miss the market that flash games has proven exist, fun innovative games utilising precise 2D controls utilising the familiar and capable mouse interface. And I think to a casual user, full 3D tracking may be making games too deep to just dive into.

Anyway. I hope I've manage to convince you of the virtues of the humble computer mouse.

 

[Treblaine]

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

I don't know, I've played Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube and Wii, while the Wii was better than gamecube's gamepad, it was NOTHING compared to Resident Evil 5 on PC (which plays beautifully on that platform, btw) when using mouse and keyboard.

Mouse aim just made it so easy to get headshots and snap shots you pretty much had to play on the highest difficulty.

Put it this way, would you be willing to throw away the USB mouse you are likely using right now to browse the internet and settle for a motion type controller?

The same ability to quickly and easily click on small icons is exactly the same as quickly and easily getting a headshot in a shooter when using mouse aim.

 

[Reolus]

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

I don't know, I've played Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube and Wii, while the Wii was better than gamecube's gamepad, it was NOTHING compared to Resident Evil 5 on PC (which plays beautifully on that platform, btw) when using mouse and keyboard.

Mouse aim just made it so easy to get headshots and snap shots you pretty much had to play on the highest difficulty.

Put it this way, would you be willing to throw away the USB mouse you are likely using right now to browse the internet and settle for a motion type controller?

The same ability to quickly and easily click on small icons is exactly the same as quickly and easily getting a headshot in a shooter when using mouse aim.

I have to ask you; do you play a lot of PC games? Something which is "good" is often what is most accessible or most comfortable to you, so if you're a PC gamer at heart then it is going to feel "most natural".

I think Mr. Miyamoto enjoys defying convention and established basics (sixaxis) when it comes to design and playing processes. I think that he has the courage to attempt strange things helps keep gaming fresh.

After all, there's plenty of people who just follow trends and comfortable success. But who wants be the best at being mundane?

If Nintendo is the only company seen as trying "bizarre" things, what does that tell you about the rest of the industry?

 

[Super Toast]

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

I don't know, I've played Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube and Wii, while the Wii was better than gamecube's gamepad, it was NOTHING compared to Resident Evil 5 on PC (which plays beautifully on that platform, btw) when using mouse and keyboard.

Mouse aim just made it so easy to get headshots and snap shots you pretty much had to play on the highest difficulty.

Put it this way, would you be willing to throw away the USB mouse you are likely using right now to browse the internet and settle for a motion type controller?

The same ability to quickly and easily click on small icons is exactly the same as quickly and easily getting a headshot in a shooter when using mouse aim.

I agree. I love my PS3, but computer gaming is just better. (5 months 'til I get a new PC for my birthday)

 

[John Funk]

To quoth: And when you say "Oh, it's inaccurate if you're pointing at something far away," of course it is. A mouse would be, too.

No, I don't think it is a case that you simply disagree, if you did read my post in full as you say I think it's simply a case that you fail to understand the simple truth of the matter.

Look, it's simple maths:

screen distance: 0.75m
pistol target distance: 10m

relative distance = 10/0.75 = 13.33

So for a Circular target that is say 17cm wide, projected back to only 0.75m it would be:

17/13.33 = 1.25cm ~ 1/2 inch

OK, look at this little pic:

That's roughly how big a 17cm Olympic Air-Pistol target will appear at 10m (assuming you have a 15.5 inch screen and are sitting approximately 75cm from the screen) get a ruler and check it's about 0.5inch.

Now how easy is it for you with a mouse to click on the very bullseye of the target? Hell you'd find it easy to repeatedly and quickly put the cursor dead centre. But Olympic shooters with the same APPARENT sized target struggle to get any where close to half on the bullseye and that is ENTIRELY down to how the RULES of the sport require a POINTING stance.

Now the air pistols used have excellent sights, and they can be as clear to place as a mouse cursor but AGAIN AND AGAIN we come back to how holding your arm out straight is an incredibly inefficient, ineffective and outdated way of precisely aiming and they only do that because the rules of the Olympic Sport require a single shooting hand is used, unsupported.

So I'm sorry but your argument of "a mouse struggles just as much to hit 'far away' targets" just doesn't hold an ounce of water.

See one of the great things about a mouse is once the cursor is on target, just relax, and the cursor will stay right on target. But with a pointer you must CLENCH to hold position.

And at the end of the day... has your mother ever fired a pistol accurately? Well, who knows your mom could be a cop or something but mine hasn't who is along with hundreds of millions of other "casual users" that are familiar and confident with a mouse. Hell, of new computer users, if it's one thing they take naturally to it's the mouse.

You seem to hold FAR too much importance to this innate GESTURE of pointing as if it is some kind of precise human measuring device like the ability to distinguish which way is up and down. Pointing is JUST a gesture in part of our library of body language, it may be "INTUITIVE" to do it but it is NOT intuitive to do it accurately. EVERYONE struggles to point with accuracy or precision. Nobody struggles with a mouse, or at lest not for long.

I think I have established beyond any doubt exactly how the general public are familiar, competent and capable with the mouse.

You mention touch controls, well those are a much better step in the right direction, I'm a big fan of the Nintendo DS for it's touch-pad but a touch pad is far from ideal though is suited to a portable device as size, weight and space are premium so buttons, tracking, pad and output are all shoved onto one screen which can be less than ideal sometimes. I mean the stylus/finger obscures the screen, you can't get proper buttons, the pad/tracking is not as accurate as it could be if it had a dedicated area. But at least your hand can be partially supported and it is far more like writing which can be very quick and precise.

You also mention other non-aiming aspects like a virtual golf tee and I will agree with you whole heartedly on that and Sony definitely does as well. If you look at their adverts they have quite rightly focused far more on how PS-Move is a great 3D tracking technology with their boxing simulator and so on rather than an excellent 2D tracker that a simple mouse is. Hell, Socom 4's aiming and LBP's "magic-hand" seemed like an afterthought in their presentations.

Though the Big Three are fools to miss the market that flash games has proven exist, fun innovative games utilising precise 2D controls utilising the familiar and capable mouse interface. And I think to a casual user, full 3D tracking may be making games too deep to just dive into.

Anyway. I hope I've manage to convince you of the virtues of the humble computer mouse.

Dude, you are the only one here talking about shooting / holding your arm out straight. I never once brought that up.

I know how useful mice are. I'm a big PC gamer and prefer them to controllers for most types of games (but you wouldn't catch me dead playing a fighting game on mouse/keyboard), but I watch my aunt try to do something simple (to me) as navigate in WoW, or my dad try to play Super Smash Bros Melee, and there's no doubt in my mind that Miyamoto is right.

The Wii - and Natal/Move - are on the right track in utilizing non-traditional controllers to help get non-gamers into gaming because the controller is so intimidating. It doesn't work for every game, of course, and the tech might not be all there, but there is no interface device more natural than the human hand. None. Period.

 

[Treblaine]

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

I don't know, I've played Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube and Wii, while the Wii was better than gamecube's gamepad, it was NOTHING compared to Resident Evil 5 on PC (which plays beautifully on that platform, btw) when using mouse and keyboard.

Mouse aim just made it so easy to get headshots and snap shots you pretty much had to play on the highest difficulty.

Put it this way, would you be willing to throw away the USB mouse you are likely using right now to browse the internet and settle for a motion type controller?

The same ability to quickly and easily click on small icons is exactly the same as quickly and easily getting a headshot in a shooter when using mouse aim.

I have to ask you; do you play a lot of PC games? Something which is "good" is often what is most accessible or most comfortable to you, so if you're a PC gamer at heart then it is going to feel "most natural".

After all, there's plenty of people who just follow trends and comfortable success. But who wants be the best at being mundane? (sixaxis) when it comes to design and playing processes. I think that he has the courage to attempt strange things helps keep gaming fresh.

After all, there's plenty of people who just follow trends and comfortable success. But who wants be the best at being mundane?

If Nintendo is the only company seen as trying "bizarre" things, what does that tell you about the rest of the industry?

I came to PC gaming quite late, from the mid-late 90's when I got my N64 right through most of the 00's on mainly PS2. So I had a good 6-7 years of experience with consoles and gamepad controls before I discovered PC gaming in about 2004-5 when I was about 16-17 years old. Still I was mainly PS2 and later Gamecube as I didn't get my own PC to install whatever I liked till 2006, so in fact I've been mainly a console gamer longer than I've really been into PC.

But I'm telling you, I remember the feeling when I first played games like Half Life, Counter Strike and Max Payne with mouse aim... it was like a revelation. The FEEL of games like that was unlike anything I'd played on consoles that just seemed slow, plodding and spammy in comparison.

I remember thinking back in the mid 2000's what a genius idea it was to map the aiming of a gun and looking around to the mouse, it just came SO naturally I could get right into it. Though I'll admit, I took a while to get used to the WASD controls I soon learned to exploit their advantages.

I'm telling you, if you just give it a go, give it a CHANCE and you'll love it and be great with it. But no one is going to set it up for you (except maybe some internet cafes), Microsoft or Sony will walk you through every step with console titles but it's not going to be the best you can get.

Of course I still have a soft spot for those classic console shooters like Goldeneye, Perfect Dark and Timesplitters, but I could only ever just "enjoy" them, they were just "nice" now. But playing these fast paced PC games snapping off accurate shots it really got my adrenaline pumping! I was no longer struggling with the controls, the challenge was now entirely within THE GAME, I could aim anywhere I liked and the only limit was the response time of my own nervous system. It's like the difference between watching a relatively slow paced but suave 60's heist movie compared to a Honk Kong action flick! I mean even the most intense moments in the Halo series/online seem sedate compared to a typical session of Team Fortress 2.

To Quoth: After all, there's plenty of people who just follow trends and comfortable success. But who wants be the best at being mundane?.... After all, there's plenty of people who just follow trends and comfortable success. But who wants be the best at being mundane?

Funny you should say that as the stylus controlled touch screen is older than the Dual Shock in terms of tech, circa mid 90's if you remember the "palm pilot" craze, and yet the Nintendo DS has been the company's biggest success by utilising what seemed like an old and "mundane" technology of resistive touch screen.

People are familiar with stylus based touch screens and most people have good dexterity from writing, but implementing this in a portable games console gave it INCREDIBLE capability in terms of controls. I've got a DS and I find it's second only to mouse in ease and precision of aiming, definitely surpassed the joystick on gamepads only it's so portable and compact!

In fact Nintendo very nearly gave the Wii DS style touch pad controls only they took a big gamble instead (and won) with this untested accelerometer-based technology, though I think they could have done so much better if they'd released the Wii that used just a good old mouse. They got away with the 90's-tastic touch screen for the DS...

Sure, they would have sacrificed a lot of initial momentum as a hell of a lot of people bought the Wii just because it seemed like a console from the future in terms of interface, and the DS too got off to a slow start as it didn't have any one "Wow" feature about it. But a standard mouse interface would have made it MOST accessible for the widest possible audience. I know I'd have one by now... if they also supported a proper digital output and gave it a price cut to stay competitive with MS + Sony

 

[Treblaine]

Dude, you are the only one here talking about shooting / holding your arm out straight. I never once brought that up.

I know how useful mice are. I'm a big PC gamer and prefer them to controllers for most types of games (but you wouldn't catch me dead playing a fighting game on mouse/keyboard), but I watch my aunt try to do something simple (to me) as navigate in WoW, or my dad try to play Super Smash Bros Melee, and there's no doubt in my mind that Miyamoto is right.

The Wii - and Natal/Move - are on the right track in utilizing non-traditional controllers to help get non-gamers into gaming because the controller is so intimidating. It doesn't work for every game, of course, and the tech might not be all there, but there is no interface device more natural than the human hand. None. Period.

Hmm... I don't see how non-gamers would find PS-move's glowing orb controller less intimidating than a familiar computer mouse, or the idea of no controller at all with Natal. You have to admit my opinion has some merit? That the mouse control interface COULD be used to sell a Wii type console in appealing to a large market.

"no interface device more natural than the human hand. None. Period."

A computer mouse uses the hand?
: /

Trust me, some company will eventually find a way to exploit the mouse for the consoles on the mass market, me thinks it might be Apple but who knows. Us PC gamers have been going on about mouse aim for coming up on 2 decades now, and console have been trying to bring the wonders of PC to the mass market for ages.

 

[Mr. Mike]

Thank you Nintendo. I see you as being the bridge that people cross from non-gaming land to the fertile greens of the hardcore gaming pasture. Keep up the good work.

 

[Trapilon]

Also, there is a LOT (keeping up the rhetoric here) more to gaming than FPS where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control.

I don't know, I've played Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube and Wii, while the Wii was better than gamecube's gamepad, it was NOTHING compared to Resident Evil 5 on PC (which plays beautifully on that platform, btw) when using mouse and keyboard.

Mouse aim just made it so easy to get headshots and snap shots you pretty much had to play on the highest difficulty.

Put it this way, would you be willing to throw away the USB mouse you are likely using right now to browse the internet and settle for a motion type controller?

The same ability to quickly and easily click on small icons is exactly the same as quickly and easily getting a headshot in a shooter when using mouse aim.

I think you got me wrong. I was referring to other genres like racing games by saying "where aiming with a mouse is useless and/or inferior to controllers/motion control". You're absolutly right about FPS. I suck on cod6 for the ps3 because I'm rather used to aiming with a mouse than with controlers.